Bitcoin Forum

Why do we still have to use multiple purpose hardware like smartphones and pc for wallets ? Ever since I have known bitcoin I have been waiting for a secure hardware wallet for sending and receiving bitcoins so to introduce bitcoin to my family and people around me that aren't tech savy enough to keep their bitcoins safe. And don't tell me that trezor is a wallet it is just way secure your wallet.

We could put up a bounty for the development of of an open source hardware wallet.




by single purpose hardware wallet I mean something like the bitcoincard but no need for the mesh network nor for it to be this thin and small =v        

you clearly did not read my post.

I would pay nothing because I'd just use a usb drive if I wanted to store bitcoins offline

There is a world of difference between a wallet and a cold storage device.

Here we have an example of someone who understood exactly NOTHING about the thread

I think that the majority of people who use bitcoin already own smartphones (massive generalization, but chances are if you're savvy enough to use bitcoin, you're savvy enough to own a smartphone).  I know that I, owning a smartphone, wouldn't want to carry something else with me.  One of the (many) conveniences of bitcoin is that it eliminates the need to carry a wallet full of cash; I think having a hardware wallet seems a little redundant to me.  As for those that aren't tech savvy enough to use a smartphone, I think giving them a hardware wallet would be even worse; now they have ways to lose the coins both physically and electronically.  Just my two satoshis.

Is http://www.bitcointrezor.com/ just being poorly marketed or what?

The market is smaller than people think.

It's kinda like apple where their stuff wasn't really useful until it had a large support ecosystem. If web services and exchanges started integrating Trezor into their security, they would be more useful, but Trezor relies on a different type of security model for handling bitcoin. It will really be only for desktop clients or other bitcoin services that are under your physical control. It would be nice for blockchain to support it though (I'm sure they will) until using it is simpler, or the things to use it with are more widespread, it will remain a niche product.  Although I plan to buy one quite soon.

you can not have a totally offline device for an online reality.

Actually, this is what I want too. But make the device robust. G-Shock robust. Cover it with scales, so you won’t drop it easily, and put a lanyard on it so you can’t drop it at all, say, when you are sightseeing at Niagara Falls and transferring BTC to a client...

Or what if Casio made an actual G-Shock Bitcoin wallet? More useful than Tide information in Omaha I’d say. Although I still want sunrise/sunset alarms. That’s just me though.

Many options exist for security, I won’t go into them here.

And just as some coin wallets have numerous compartments for whatever, being able to hold several different currencies might not be a bad idea. Mintchip, anyone? And some fiat as well, for gasoline/snack purchases maybe. Cambodian Tire money? Timbitcoins?

I originally thought the Trezor was a Bitcoin safe rather than just keeping your bitcoins safe - been hoping for a standalone device but must be in the minority - there's nothing more uninspiring than Bitcons on a USB stick.


http://i846.photobucket.com/albums/ab22/1973mb1973/769ee54b6647fb1299a582d4360252c6_zps5f3f6912.jpg
http://i846.photobucket.com/albums/ab22/1973mb1973/dc335ab2.jpg
http://i846.photobucket.com/albums/ab22/1973mb1973/31ecf6844e50cd710c94eb285dedbaa1.jpg
http://i846.photobucket.com/albums/ab22/1973mb1973/6f15bdf1b58b896a7c48370abdeea4a8.jpg

really cant see a need for this type of thing. if you are worried about family members not being able to handle security etc then give them an online wallet like inputs.io and they can use it like paypal.
I really cant imagine someone using bitcoin who wouldnt have a smart phone O_o

Are you suggesting using a smartphone to hold a lot of BTC's on? That is pretty dangerous.

A hardware wallet has it's own problems, but getting hacked is pretty far down the list. EMP is the other (I think).

I'm surprised we don't hear more about Trezor and hardware wallets. I do think something simpler (or cheaper) will shortly (next year or so) be developed.

IAS

Please explain me how a smartphone is more secure than a pc. Viruses exist for smartphones too

Well, I am blown away by this! Not at all what I envisioned, but Stunning! Applause, Sir!

There are some explanations on the TREZOR FAQ page on the differences between TREZOR and a USB, an encrypted wallet, a yubikey etc...

http://www.bitcointrezor.com/faq/#comparing-trezor

for example the difference between a USB and TREZOR:

"A USB flash drive is just a storage for private keys. It means that when you want to make a bitcoin transaction, you must attach your drive to the computer and let your bitcoin software read the keys from the device. At this point your private keys are accessible to viruses and malware, just as to any other software on your desktop computer. On the contrary, TREZOR is a single-purpose computer, which stores your private keys and actively signs bitcoin transactions without sending your private keys to the computer. When you want to make a bitcoin transaction, your bitcoin software just sends a transaction template to the TREZOR device and asks for a digital signature. TREZOR shows the requested amount and target address on its display. You will then confirm the transaction by pressing the hardware button. Then TREZOR signs transaction internally and sends the digital signature back to the computer, without leaking your private keys. Thanks to this, you can use TREZOR even on a vulnerable or hacked computer."

Well, I'd imagine the average non-Windows smartphone (the majority) to be notably more secure than the average Windows PC (the majority,) given equal amounts of effort put into securing the device.

But really, I think a reasonably-secured smartphone--or just one that's dedicated to the purpose--functions fairly well as a suitable hardware spending wallet, especially for anyone experienced with Bitcoin.

Honestly I think Piper is going in the direction of being a single purpose bitcoin wallet. Already it handles printing all your Private key needs. Not much of a leap to see it also handle your wallet as well. I think we will see single purpose bitcoin devices, some people would appreciate them. I certainly would.

I won't be interested in hardware wallets until I see signs that the people implementing them are serious about hardening them against malware and side channel attacks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Side_channel_attack).

Devices like the Trezor, which advertise that the code running them is open source, are immediately uninteresting because they are devices which run code.

Implementing a hardware wallet properly does not allow for shortcuts, like using general-purpose computers in the design.

I was looking into developing a hardware wallet a few weeks ago. It definitely is quite possible, but it requires much work with embedded stuff(which simple put isn't easy). Trezor is going to be your best bet for now, many of the people I've seen working on hardware wallets have fallen by the wayside.

For a hardware wallet to work, you have to have some sort of screen and perhaps some input buttons. This is not something you can just pick up from Walmart. It took me some searching to find a Chinese manufacture, but they want me to pay $500 for a dev kit. So unless someone wants to donate that, I'll going to continue to work on other more useful Bitcoin products and services.

So in summary, making a hardware wallet is extremely hard and takes lots of time and money.

For those who are not programmers and don't know how to read the code (or have nobody to do that for them) we are planning to undergo an independent security audit.

Anyway I think its easier to trust a single purpose hardware with limited protocol and opensource + the possibility to flash the firmware than a computer connected to internet having tons of software created by thousands of programmers...

I actually think of that as providing more of a false sense of security than anything else.

The ability to flashing the firmware is an attack vector, as is the existence of firmware in the first place. If you don't get a hardware wallet right the first time somebody is going to lose coins to an attack before they are able to install your firmware upgrade.

Basically, a hardware needs to be an ASIC designed for tamperproof operation with specific attention payed to avoiding information leaks that could lead to a successful side channel attack. Any product that does not, at a minimum, meet this condition is one I'd never buy or recommend.

They don't need an asic, they could jut put the software in ROM.

That does not accomplish anything in terms of the vulnerabilities inherent to running software.

Smart devices are enough, I think.

I've never owned a smart phone and have been using Bitcoin since July 2010.

I'd urge you to reconsider; I think you're missing out.

As cheap as they are now, they're affordable enough to buy one just as a dedicated mobile spending wallet. And once you have that, it may very well change the way you use (and view) Bitcoin.

Flashing firmware is not an attack vector, if the firmware is signed by a trusted party.  An ASIC would be far worse; there are no ways for third parties to truly audit the ASIC.  Open source code, on the other hand, can be audited by a large swath of programmers.

What side channel attacks are you specifically worried about on a hardware wallet?  The only opportunity for a hardware wallet to leak secret information through a side channel is during signing.  When the hardware wallet is secured by a password, this will only occur when the user is using the device for signing legitimate transactions.  This will occur infrequently, to put it lightly.  Power and timing side channel attacks require huge sample sizes, relative to the number of transactions a user will ever have signed.  Not to mention that it's impossible for the host to time the actual signing, unless it's correlating with power consumption and I don't believe a PC can extract that information from their USB host chips.

To be truely useful, wouldn't a hardware wallet have to be Wifi enabled? or maybe Data enabled like a smart phone? Would it need it's own copy of the blockchain? Would it keep it up to date so you don't have to wait 10 minutes for it to Sync before making a transaction? ???

If you really want one, you could've just made one yourself...

I don't know about that. I think it's pretty small, but not sure what others think.   Few to none of my friends have heard of bitcoin and the ones who have....don't care about it.

It is still very early on in its adoption rate for sure. 

And yes Apple is a good analogy.  I had mp3 players long before Apple came out with the Ipod...years before.  But they just waited until the market matured and then introduced their device (and marketed it like crazy)